scott.marlowe wrote:
> On Sun, 22 Jun 2003, Bruce Momjian wrote:
>
> > Bruce Momjian wrote:
> > >
> > > Reading the subject, "creepy ... dates", that is exactly how I feel
> > > about the described current date behavior --- "creepy".
> > >
> > > Because I have only seen one person defend our current behavior, and
> > > many object, I am going to add to TODO:
> > >
> > > * Allow current datestyle to restrict dates; prevent month/day swapping
> > > from making invalid dates valid?
> > > * Prevent month/day swapping of ISO dates to make invalid dates valid
> >
> > I added a question mark to the first item so we can consider it later.
> > Most agreed on the second item, but a few thought the first one might be
> > OK as is.
>
> What are ISO dates? Are those the ones like 22 Feb 2003? Just wondering.
YYYY-MM-DD
> The one thing that should absolutely be turned off is day/month swapping
> on dates of the form: 2003-02-22.
Right.
> I've seen little actual defense of the current behaviour, I'd say more
> like questioning whether or not we should change directions in mid stream
> than defense.
True. I do think we will have to make the change some day, and report
it in the release notes.
--
Bruce Momjian | http://candle.pha.pa.us
pgman@candle.pha.pa.us | (610) 359-1001
+ If your life is a hard drive, | 13 Roberts Road
+ Christ can be your backup. | Newtown Square, Pennsylvania 19073